Portaphile V2 Owners Thread - Page 4

I've been comparing my portaphile with my sr71 over and over, and thinking, 'is it redundant to have both' ? Is one a superlative of the other? The answer I keep coming back to is no. The Portaphile just sounds stunning and trumps over the sr71 if there's any performance that involves vocals. It really goes deep and listening to it is like eavesdropping on a private performance. The soundstage brings out all the emotions. On the other hand, when it comes to live concerts, the Portaphile gives you a listening room back stage, whereas the sr71 puts you right at front stage in front of the musicians because of all the air and detail-- this is where the portaphile loses the edge. One has traits the other one doesn't, and I'm thoroughly satisfied listening to either one. So the sr71 stays.

It's hard to say since I've been listening to it off and on throughout the day. I don't use EQ at all. I don't do a technical evaluation to see what sound is missing from the spectrum, because you're cheating your perception that way. The amp becomes nothing more than a $200 DFX.

What I do is I try to detect where the singer is, and see how the amplifier brings the music closer to life. If there's anything missing in the sound, it will be implicit in this evaluation. E.g. If the sound is flat, it will be harder to detect where the singer is. Once I detect the location of the singer (where is she? how far?), then I try to visualize the circumstance under which the singer is doing the performance. A concert hall? living room? open field? etc. In other words, I do a perceptual analysis, not a technical one. If there is something missing in the sound, I'll notice it in the way that it affects the realism of the performance. If it doesn't affect the realism, then whatever's missing isn't significant enough, and I wouldn't care about it anyway.

Honestly, whenever someone starts talking about mids and highs and blah, it all goes over my head because they really don't mean anything to me. Take this supermacro review:

"That peaky sound some folks have mentioned, was entirely absent and in its stead, especially with a triangle or cymbals, a crisp vibrant sound was heard, energetic and fast with enough sparkle to keep one interested in the sound but not overbearing..."

What does 'energetic, fast, with enough sparkle' sound like? I have no clue. It's audiophile's mumbo-jumbo for describing a sound trait, but it really tells you nothing about it, unless you hang around with these people long enough to know exactly what they mean by 'sparkling.'

I try to avoid using 'elitish' words whenever I try to describe some sound. Hopefully everyone understood my description of what the Portaphile sounds like.

I see that some people has the Portaphile and the SR-71, but I would like to know if anybody has compared the Porta, using the AC backplate so you can use it with more voltage, with the SR-71. I wonder if more juice on the Porta will make it sound closer to the SR-71, Anybody has tried it?

I purchased the AC backplate along with the amp, but I haven't purchased the elpac power supply since I don't want to spend an extra $30 until I know the amp is a keeper (and now I know it is, so I'll be buying that ps soon).

But anyway, I highly doubt the portaphile will sound any closer to the sr71. Acoustically, the sr71 has a smaller dimension than the portaphile-- in other words, it sounds flatter-- less direction. You don't want the portaphile to sound closer to the sr71 in this respect because it would be a downgrade!

From the other side of the coin-- the sr71 has significantly more air and is snappier. Listening to a live performance with an sr-71 is a real treat, because all those drum beats are really quick and nimble, not to mention punchy, so you feel like you're right up there in the front row! You don't need to perform an A/B switch to tell the difference between an sr71 and a portaphile. The same goes for sr71 and supermacro v1.

I agree. I think soundstage is a hard concept for a lot of people (including me). I believe a lot of people use the word 'soundstage' loosely-- they just reuse the word like an english writer reuse prose if doing so makes him sound smarter and seems to fit the mood.

I think for most people, the hunt for the perfect amp is more fun than having the amp itself-- hence the constant desire to upgrade to something better, something more expensive. But when all is said and done, I think in the end, the guy who spends tens of thousands of dollars on audio gear is doing the same thing you're doing--- performing a spectrum analysis and see which frequencies are missing. In other words, he worries about the technical composition of music (lows, mids, highs, blah) instead of paying attention to the realism of the sound.

Thanks, I have to say I am leaning to the Portaphile, but I am still considering maybe a PiMETA or basic PPA, since I am going to use it more in a stationary fashion than a portable one. But the Porta is tempting, very much so.

I personally prefer Sennheisers over Grados or Etys (though I only have a lowly er6i). I'm planning to get a DT880 though since I've heard good things about it. My HD580 on the Portaphile sounds really, really good. I think Diana Krall is pretty boring in general, but through the Portaphile she's very enjoyable to hear!

I'm not sure how the er6i differs from the 4P or S, but I also think the Portaphile and er6i make a pretty good combination. There's a smooth? quality to the sound... well, not smooth exactly... more like a 'symphonic' effect.

Dip? (...filled)

I had a similar impression with the beta V2 -- that the range between 500-1000 was slightly recessed, and that it was making voices seem thin, recessed and lacking the throaty body that gives voices their rich, live quality. After a ridiculous amount of burn in that problem evaporated. Perhaps the same will happen with the new V2. I wasn't aware exactly when that character of the sound improved, but it had to be at least 300 hours in -- maybe more. Some DIY headfiers have discussed some Black Gate caps requiring 400 hours to fully mature. As I've said before, the character of the amp will change.

Soundstage

Don't worry about trying to grasp soundstage as a concept. Just picture yourself in front of a stage with musicians on it. How does everybody sound? Can you tell where they are (left-to-right, front-to-back, sitting/standing/jumping/hanging from the rafters)? Is there a particular sense of width and depth to the stage full of performers? How do the complex sounds and resonances of their instruments/voices interact, blend, fill the space and sound to your ears? How does the entire space you're in sound and feel? Is it a club or studio with low ceiling, close walls and sound-damping tiles all around, Avery Fisher Hall, a cathedral? Can you hear at least 3 dimensions -- can you hear the width, depth and height of the space and the position of the performers in it? Is there shape and body to each performers individual sound/soundspace? Does the band/orchestra as a whole -- as well as each individual performer and his/her instrument -- have weight, size, dimension, impact, energy? Can you feel and hear the air around you and around the performers? Can you hear their movement through space (assuming they do move). Can you heard all the myriad ambient noises in the space? Etc., etc., etc.

Soundstage, soundspace, dimension, air, placement, etc. Just put yourself (in your mind) in a live performance you've experienced -- concert hall, club, arena, studio, church, finished basement, garage, whatever -- and the images should come back to you. If not, go to a live performance and experience it. Forget analytical concepts. It's about the music and the performance. Does a recording heard through an amp sound at least a little bit like you imagine it might have been performed, or is it flat as a pancake and twice as lifeless? (...can't think of a better metaphor at the moment...) Does it sound like there's a real width and depth to the perceived performance stage with the performers positioned in a 3-dimensional space? Is everybody somewhat bunched up towards the center with no particular depth? Is the piano behind your left ear, the bass somewhere to the right and behind your right ear and the drums vaguely splashed all around? You can probably tell if the "soundstage" seems right or not.

I went to an Arturo Sandoval set at the The Blue note last Fall. He had an incredible group of musicians, really well balanced sound system, great selection of music, skill, brilliance, versatility, drive, humor..... The small room was awash with great music, rhythms, waves of sound pressure, tremendous energy and excitement. I could hear the position of every musician, the wood cases and resonances of the piano and string bass, the sounds of all the other instruments resonating through the piano as well (it was just to my left), the amazing unique sound that was the slamming blend of all the instruments and voices. (I was really drawn into the music -- but the instruments were so vivid I still remember most of them.) The CD should be available very shortly, and I really hope it's well-engineered. If a recording can capture at least a good share of that experience, and if an amp can recreate the shape, energy and impact of it while maintaining the sense of space -- enough to immerse the listener in the moment, then that's what's I'm looking for in an amp.

Does this mean that I probably wouldn't miss much going the Portaphile route if most of what I listen to are -not- live concert recording? I prefer to just listen J/Kpop non concert albums, with preference given to female singers.

?

Hmmm. atx - "gives you a listening room back stage..."? That seems pretty extreme. I never experienced anything remotely like that with the beta V2. I had the experience that the performers were right in front of me spread out across the stage, vivid, dimensional, clearly placed... hardly back stage. Perhaps it's another lack-of-burn-in issue.

I happen to love the SR-71, and I keep repeating that it does one thing with the soundstage that no other amp has yet approached. To my ears it has the best left-to-right soundstage image, the performers are very distinctly placed, and it seems to have the most integrated stagefront sound. It's almost as though it has a crossfeed-like feature that does not negatively impact any other part the sound. It also places the stage front (the performers) a little farther away from the listener, where I found that the (older) Portaphile V2 put me closer to the performers.

[The "listening room back stage" image is something I experienced with another amp which turned out to have a problem (I won't mention the name) -- and that amp sounded as though I was at a nightclub, but in a small room or booth at the back with a curtain slightly obscuring and distancing the sound.]

Are you sure you meant a backstage room? Wait for more burnin and if you still that, explain it a little more.

I think you have a different perception of what "back stage" sounds like, or maybe I used the wrong word. To me, "back stage" means not directly in front of the audience, but somehow a little farther back, enough such that the sound have sufficient distance to reflect and have a distinct direction. The sound is by no means obscured, as you mentioned with the problematic amp.


Left-to-right, but not front-to-back. The sr71 sound is too forward to have a 3-dimensional soundstage. Like I mentioned earlier, it's like you're sitting in the front row of a performance. You hear various instruments to the left or to the right, and the singer is in front, but you don't get any sense of depth. It's inferior to the portaphile in this regard.

When I listen to crooners like Diana Krall or Pink Martini, it's significantly more enjoyable in the Portaphile than the SR71. With the Portaphile their voices just seem to shimmer and echo in 3-dimensional space!


I didn't mean to imply that the portaphile isn't good for live concerts. I just meant that if you do listen to live concerts, the sr71 will give you a front row seat. Depending on your preference, this may or may not be a good thing. It's a "different" sound-- whether or not it's better depends on your listening preference. For me personally, I prefer the "front row" sound slightly for live concerts, although listening using the Portaphile is also just as equally enjoyable and I wouldn't mind switching.

It seems to me that the apparent merits---soundstage-wise---of the SR-71 and Portaphile may well depend on the headphones used in the comparison. For instance, the AKG k501 is generally held to have a soundstage that is very wide but not too deep, while the Sennheiser HD580/600 series has better depth but lacks width.

Extrapolating from previous comments in this thread (way too many to quote), I suspect that someone with Senns might prefer the SR-71 while the Portaphile/k501 combination would also be complementary (assuming the Portaphile can stir up the AKGs sufficiently).

So many choices, so little time...